States pay for the national guard. Governors give command to the president however they are under state authority and can be recalled by the state ie the governor of that state. For example Trump did not intervene in the riots of last summer because governors did not authorize it. NG is different from active duty or reserves.
Everything has a political cost. The president stepping in to let a city burn to the ground would equate to democrats committing political suicide. If failing in Afghanistan made him look bad, that move would wake up all but the most antifa of democrats. I know we’ve seen a lot of crazy things. And the DS is looking to be end america and start a war, but that’s too obvious. Haulting a governor from exercising his authority to protect his own state will not fly. Yes the fed can federalize the NG but states can refuse and they have in the past. Governors were threatening to recall guardsmen from DC because of how they were being treated. It’s not as clear cut as you’re making it sound. I’m not trying to argue but states have authority over their own NG. They are federalized by agreement with the federal government.
No. NG are state militias. It’s technically illegal for federal troops to activate in times of non-war. That’s why NG are used for actions within the states. This is part of the problem in America. The president is not emperor. The NG has been activated for federal matters of federal law. The president cannot on a whim federalize NG unit’s because he wants to. This nation has laws and a constitution. Saying things like this is no different than vax mandate pushers. The president cannot activate the NG to promote riots. If he tried, he might succeed but it would still be illegal, especially if he did it to override the presiding governor of the state. That is federalism. CIC does not equal king.
States pay for the national guard. Governors give command to the president however they are under state authority and can be recalled by the state ie the governor of that state. For example Trump did not intervene in the riots of last summer because governors did not authorize it. NG is different from active duty or reserves.
https://greatawakening.win/p/140IifuGwT/the-new-commander-of-the-oklahom/c/
Here’s a gaw post linked to an article that demonstrates the power states have over their own guard units.
Everything has a political cost. The president stepping in to let a city burn to the ground would equate to democrats committing political suicide. If failing in Afghanistan made him look bad, that move would wake up all but the most antifa of democrats. I know we’ve seen a lot of crazy things. And the DS is looking to be end america and start a war, but that’s too obvious. Haulting a governor from exercising his authority to protect his own state will not fly. Yes the fed can federalize the NG but states can refuse and they have in the past. Governors were threatening to recall guardsmen from DC because of how they were being treated. It’s not as clear cut as you’re making it sound. I’m not trying to argue but states have authority over their own NG. They are federalized by agreement with the federal government.
No. NG are state militias. It’s technically illegal for federal troops to activate in times of non-war. That’s why NG are used for actions within the states. This is part of the problem in America. The president is not emperor. The NG has been activated for federal matters of federal law. The president cannot on a whim federalize NG unit’s because he wants to. This nation has laws and a constitution. Saying things like this is no different than vax mandate pushers. The president cannot activate the NG to promote riots. If he tried, he might succeed but it would still be illegal, especially if he did it to override the presiding governor of the state. That is federalism. CIC does not equal king.